Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1231257056
1231257056
edu>
To: santer1@llnl.gov
Subject: Re: [Fwd: data request]
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 10:50:56 -0800 (PST)
Cc: "David C. Bader" <bader2@llnl.gov>, Bill Goldstein <goldstein3@llnl.gov>, Pat
Berge <berge1@llnl.gov>, Cherry Murray <murray38@llnl.gov>, George Miller
<miller21@llnl.gov>, Anjuli Bamzai <Anjuli.Bamzai@science.doe.gov>, Tomas Diaz De
La Rubia <delarubia@llnl.gov>, Doug Rotman <rotman1@llnl.gov>, Peter Thorne
<peter.thorne@metoffice.gov.uk>, Leopold Haimberger
<leopold.haimberger@univie.ac.at>, Karl Taylor <taylor13@llnl.gov>, Tom Wigley
<wigley@cgd.ucar.edu>, John Lanzante <John.Lanzante@noaa.gov>, Susan Solomon
<ssolomon@frii.com>, Melissa Free <Melissa.Free@noaa.gov>, peter gleckler
<gleckler1@llnl.gov>, "Philip D. Jones" <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>, Thomas R Karl
<Thomas.R.Karl@noaa.gov>, Steve Klein <klein21@mail.llnl.gov>, carl mears
<mears@remss.com>, Doug Nychka <nychka@ucar.edu>, Gavin Schmidt
<gschmidt@giss.nasa.gov>, Steven Sherwood <Steven.Sherwood@yale.edu>, Frank Wentz
<frank.wentz@remss.com>
"Thanks" Ben for this, hi all and happy new year. I had a similar experience--but
not FOIA since we at Climatic Change are a private institution--with Stephen
McIntyre demanding that I have the Mann et al cohort publish all their computer
codes for papers published in Climatic Change. I put the question to the editorial
board who debated it for weeks. The vast majority opinion was that scientists
should give enough information on their data sources and methods so others who are
scientifically capable can do their own brand of replication work, but that this
does not extend to personal computer codes with all their undocumented sub routines
etc. It would be odious requirement to have scientists document every line of code
so outsiders could then just apply them instantly. Not only is this an intellectual
property issue, but it would dramatically reduce our productivity since we are not
in the business of producing software products for general consumption and have no
resources to do so. The NSF, which funded the studies I published, concurred--so
that ended that issue with Climatic Change at the time a few years ago.
Let the lawyers figure this out, but be sure that, like Ben is doing now, you
disclose the maximum reasonable amount of information so competent scientists can
do replication work, but short of publishing undocumented personalized codes etc.
The end of the email Ben attached shows their intent--to discredit papers so they
have no "evidentiary value in public policy"--what you resort to when you can't win
the intellectual battle scientifically at IPCC or NAS.
Good luck with this, and expect more of it as we get closer to international
climate policy actions, We are witnessing the "contrarian battle of the bulge" now,
and expect that all weapons will be used.
Cheers, Steve
PS Please do not copy or forward this email.
Stephen H. Schneider
Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies,
Professor, Department of Biology and
Senior Fellow, Woods Institute for the Environment
Mailing address:
Yang & Yamazaki Environment & Energy Building - MC 4205
473 Via Ortega
Ph: 650 725 9978
F: 650 725 4387
Websites: climatechange.net
patientfromhell.org
I have spent the last two months of my scientific career dealing with
multiple requests for these model datasets under the U.S. Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA). I have been able to do little or no productive
research during this time. This is of deep concern to me.
From the beginning, my position on this matter has been clear and
consistent. The primary climate model data used in our IJoC paper are
part of the so-called "CMIP-3" (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project)
archive at LLNL, and are freely available to any scientific researcher.
The primary observational (satellite and radiosonde) datasets used in
our IJoC paper are also freely available. The algorithms used for
calculating "synthetic" Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) temperatures from
climate model data (to facilitate comparison with actual satellite
temperatures) have been documented in several peer-reviewed
publications. The bottom line is that any interested scientist has all
the scientific information necessary to replicate the calculations
performed in our IJoC paper, and to check whether the conclusions
reached in that paper were sound.
Neither Mr. Smith nor Mr. Stephen McIntyre (Mr. McIntyre is the
initiator of the FOIA requests to the U.S. DOE and NOAA, and the
operator of the "ClimateAudit.com" blog) is interested in full
replication of our calculations, starting from the primary climate model
and observational data. Instead, they are demanding the value-added
quantities we have derived from the primary datasets (i.e., the
synthetic MSU temperatures).
I would like a clear ruling from DOE lawyers - ideally from both the
NNSA and DOE Office of Science branches - on the legality of such data
requests. They are troubling, for a number of reasons.
3. There is a real danger that such FOIA requests could (and are
already) being used as a tool for harassing scientists rather than for
valid scientific discovery. Mr. McIntyre's FOIA requests to DOE and NOAA
are but the latest in a series of such requests. In the past, Mr.
McIntyre has targeted scientists at Penn State University, the U.K.
Climatic Research Unit, and the National Climatic Data Center in
Asheville. Now he is focusing his attention on me. The common
denominator is that Mr. McIntyre's attention is directed towards studies
claiming to show evidence of large-scale surface warming, and/or a
prominent human "fingerprint" in that warming. These serial FOIA
requests interfere with our ability to do our job.
The public release of the MSU data used in our IJoC paper may or may not
resolve these problems. If Mr. McIntyre's past performance is a guide to
the future, further FOIA requests will follow. I would like to know that
I have the full support of LLNL management and the U.S. Dept. of Energy
in dealing with these unwarranted and intrusive requests.
Sincerely,
Ben Santer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin D. Santer
Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
P.O. Box 808, Mail Stop L-103
Livermore, CA 94550, U.S.A.
Tel: (925) 422-3840
FAX: (925) 422-7675
email: santer1@llnl.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------